I know some people say grip angle of the Ruger MK3 and the 22/45 is a matter of preference. But is one anatomically superior than the other? If we were to consider only the human hand and arm, and ignore everything else, which style of grip is more suitable for slow, deliberate target shooting, like Bullseye competition?
If you enjoyed reading about "grip angle Ruger mk3 22/45" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
August 14, 2011, 12:51 PM
Depends on what you like. Some bullseye guys like 1911s, some prefer the Luger/MKI/II frame angle. I doubt you'll find someone who'll tell you one is anatomically superior.
August 14, 2011, 02:32 PM
I've never been comfortable with the steep grip angle of the Standard Auto and MK-series. They're great pistols, reliable and accurate but just uncomfortable for me. I had two and they were great pistols but I had to let them go. Then they introduced the 22/45 which was better but the polymer frame always felt too narrow for my hands and also very slick. So until the 22/45RP was introduced, I was a Browning Buckmark shooter. All I needed was full thickness 1911 grips, the Volquartsen trigger kit and a couple other mods to find perfection. It now has a creep and overtravel-free 2lb trigger, the mags drop-free and is very comfortable.
I think hand size varies too much for there to be a one size fits all solution.
If you want to know what's ideal for Bullseye competitions, perhaps you could look at what is currently used for Bullseye competition.
I suspect that an angled grip is better since it's more common on target pistols.
August 14, 2011, 08:25 PM
Angled is better. I know, I know, its not a 1911, which is to some people the pinnacle of pistol design, but if you look at the high-end 22's like Pardini's and Hammerli's you'll see that the steeper angle is the way to go. Better recoil control for rapid fire (and its a 22, so the bent wrist isn't an issue like on a 45).
August 15, 2011, 11:03 PM
If you take a sight picture with each style, hold your grip, then turn your arm and look, you'll see why the steeper grip angle is technically superior for accurate, rapid target shooting.
The barrel on the straighter gripped version will be higher in comparison to the forearm.
More bore axis means more muzzle flip. Target guns are designed to get the bore axis as low as possible for a reason. The Olympics even outlawed a Russian target gun that was designed with a big sighting rib for unfair advantage. It put the barrel exactly in line with the forearm.
Aside from bore axis, a steeper grip also requires less tension in the forearm muscles to hold the barrel on target. Esp if you add tall optics such as a scope or red dot.
But everyone has slightly different anatomy. What works for most people might not work for you.
August 16, 2011, 01:02 AM
If you extend your relaxed arm forward (palm down, but not dangling at the wrist), then rotate it 90 degrees clockwise (so that the thumb is now on the upper surface of your hand), you 'll find that the natural (least stressful) hand position described is close to that of the Olympic pistols. That is the same grip angle that the Ruger Mk. 1/2/3 are designed to match.
The object of precision shooting is best served when you aren't fighting the natural tendencies of your body, but rather let them help you. The 1911 grip angle doesn't do this. What it allows is a locked wrist, which induces fatigue and muscular tremors
August 16, 2011, 08:56 AM
The Olympics even outlawed a Russian target gun that was designed with a big sighting rib for unfair advantage. It put the barrel exactly in line with the forearm.
Do you mean this? Its not illegal as far as I know but the barrel is extremely low in the hand. Its got almost no flip when shooting rapid fire. Very fun! I use it for bullseye.